In a typical engine development process, the manufacturer must make assumptions about the expected machine operation and duty cycle before going forward with the development of a control strategy that satisfies customers' acceptance and value demands while still meeting emissions requirements. For instance, a given engine may have several applications, including over the road trucks and possibly off road work machines, such as Track Type Tractors, wheel loaders, etc. In addition, each of these applications may have a plurality of different identifiable duty cycles. For instance, an over the road truck may have one duty cycle for on highway driving, another duty cycle for off highway transportation, and still another duty cycle for in town deliveries and pick ups. In another example, a Track Type Tractor might have a first duty cycle for dozing, a second duty cycle for ripping, and additional duty cycles for other machine operations. In current engine development processes, the engine manufacturer knows the engine's application, but must make assumptions as to expected duty cycles for an end user. Currently, an engine and control strategy combination is devised for a specific application with a one size fits all control strategy that is emissions compliant while meeting customer acceptance and value demands for each of several different expected duty cycles. In order to make the engine perform satisfactorily in each of the different expected duty cycles, some compromises to the engine control strategy must be made to ensure that the engine can meet the demands of each of the expected duty cycles while satisfying constraints and meeting emissions standards.
While assumptions in regard to the percentage of time in each of several different duty cycles may be very accurate for one end user, these assumptions could be substantially different from the actual duty cycles of another end user. For instance, one Track Type Tractor owner may perform dozing and ripping duty cycles in proportions that correspond closely to an engine manufacturer's assumptions, yet another Track Type Tractor owner may use their work machine almost entirely for dozing. Under the current system, both Track Type Tractor owners could have identical engine control strategies. In both cases some amount of compromise in individual customer value is nearly inherent when distributing an engine control strategy combination that has the ability to satisfy all end user performance demands while still meeting emission requirements. In addition, individual control strategies may be conceptually possible that could both further reduce emissions while still achieving customer acceptance value demands.